Hearing Backlog Balloons

     You ought to click on the image below, which is a recent Caseload Analysis Report from Social Security's Office of Disability Adjudication and Review (ODAR), and then print it out. It's worth studying and you can't really study it other than by printing it out; at least, I couldn't. This report was reproduced in the newsletter (not available online) of the National Organization of Social Security Claimants Representatives (NOSSCR).  

     Here are some highlights of the report:

• In Fiscal Year (FY) 2015, which began on October 1, 2014, through the date of this report, which is the end of May 2015, ODAR received an average of 3,046 requests for hearing per day but disposed of an average of only 2,647 a day, which means that they could only process 87% of their workload. 
• Because ODAR couldn't handle its workload, the average processing time shot up from 422 days to 491 days in just seven months. 
• The number of cases pending over 365 days increased from 242,999 at the beginning of the FY to 343,801 as of the end of May. 
• At the rate things are going, in less than two years the average processing time will be over two years.
• The number of ALJs being hired is little more than the number retiring, quitting and dying. How many times have I heard Glenn Sklar, the head of ODAR, talk about the number of ALJs the agency is hiring and say "Help is on the way"? 
• The amount of overtime available to ODAR has gone down. It averaged 32,339 hours per month in FY 2014 but only averaged 27,950 hours per month in FY 2015 through the end of May. Why is the agency relying upon so much overtime anyway? Why not just hire more employees? One answer is that in the short run new employees give little additional productivity. They have to be trained and to become proficient at what they do. Another answer is that the agency is fearful about its future appropriations. It doesn't want to hire new employees, train them and then have to furlough them.
• Don't miss the footnote to the report. During the time period covered by this report, attorney advisors issued a whooping 438 decisions. There were only 58 cases pending before attorney advisors as of the report date. Talk about a token effort! If Social Security were serious about holding down this burgeoning backlog, it could really crank up the attorney advisor program but they're worried about what Republicans in Congress would think and they're worried about the Disability Insurance Trust Fund so they do nothing.

     We could use less happy talk from Social Security about how "help is on the way" and more frank talk about just how bad things are now and how much worse they're going to get if ODAR doesn't get a bigger operating budget. There's no point pretending that things are getting better when it's obvious that things are getting dramatically worse.
     Even without a bigger operating budget, ODAR could make things a little better if it could get over its fear of being accused of "paying down the backlog." Does anybody who really knows how things work at Social Security think there would be anything wrong with letting attorney advisors approve 10% or even 20% of the incoming requests for hearing? Select claimants 55 and older as well as claimants with a diagnosis of schizophrenia or multiple sclerosis or a rheumatic disorder or something such and let the attorney advisors look at them. They'll approve 60% of them but those cases would be approved by ALJs eventually anyway. These are real people who are being put through hell for no reason.

CCD Opposes Bill Linking Social Security Disability To Transportation Bill

     The Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD) is an umbrella coalition of about 100 groups involved in helping people with disabilities. You don't hear much about CCD but it's a big deal in Washington. This is from a letter that CCD sent on July 16 to each U.S. Senator:

... [W]e write to express the Task Force’s strong opposition to enacting legislation that cuts Social Security, including Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), or Supplemental Security Income (SSI) to offset the costs of unrelated programs in the surface transportation reauthorization bill. ...

We understand that at least two Social Security policy changes are currently being considered as offsets for legislation to extend highway transportation funding. 

One measure would eliminate or reduce concurrent SSDI benefits for individuals who attempt to work – as encouraged by law – but lose their job through no fault of their own and qualify for Unemployment Insurance (UI). ...

The SSDI and UI programs were established for different purposes and largely serve different populations. Receiving UI and SSDI concurrently is legal and appropriate. This has been the long - standing position of the Social Security Administration and of the courts. ...

A second measure would bar payment of Social Security or SSI benefits to individuals with outstanding warrants for their arrest. The Social Security Act already prohibits payments to individuals fleeing from law enforcement to avoid prosecution or imprisonment, and the people who would be affected by the CUFF Act are, in fact, neither fugitives nor felons. Almost none of the individuals who would be affected by this pro vision are actual fugitives from justice and most of the warrants in question are many years old and involve minor infractions. Moreover, the Social Security Administration (SSA) attempted to administer a similar provision for a number of years, with catastrophic effect for many vulnerable people with disabilities and seniors , employing procedures that did not withstand judicial scrutiny. If Congress adopts this provision, it would return SSA to a policy that was overly broad and led to much unintended harm to seniors and people with disabilities who have not been convicted of any crime but who rely on Social Security and SSI. ...

Social Security Drafting Rules Touching On Gun Control

     From the Los Angeles Times:

Seeking tighter controls over firearm purchases, the Obama administration is pushing to ban Social Security beneficiaries from owning guns if they lack the mental capacity to manage their own affairs, a move that could affect millions whose monthly disability payments are handled by others. ...

A potentially large group within Social Security are people who, in the language of federal gun laws, are unable to manage their own affairs due to "marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease." 

There is no simple way to identify that group, but a strategy used by the Department of Veterans Affairs since the creation of the background check system is reporting anyone who has been declared incompetent to manage pension or disability payments and assigned a fiduciary.

If Social Security, which has never participated in the background check system, uses the same standard as the VA, millions of its beneficiaries would be affected. About 4.2 million adults receive monthly benefits that are managed by "representative payees." ...

Though such a ban would keep at least some people who pose a danger to themselves or others from owning guns, the strategy undoubtedly would also include numerous people who may just have a bad memory or difficulty balancing a checkbook, the critics argue.

"Someone can be incapable of managing their funds but not be dangerous, violent or unsafe," said Dr. Marc Rosen, a Yale psychiatrist who has studied how veterans with mental health problems manage their money. "They are very different determinations." ...

About 2.7 million people are now receiving disability payments from Social Security for mental health problems, a potentially higher risk category for gun ownership. An addition 1.5 million have their finances handled by others for a variety of reasons.

The agency has been drafting its policy outside of public view. Even the National Rifle Assn. was unaware of it. ...

Ari Ne'eman, a member of the National Council on Disability, said the independent federal agency would oppose any policy that used assignment of a representative payee as a basis to take any fundamental right from people with disabilities.
"The rep payee is an extraordinarily broad brush," he said.

     By the way back in January 2013, I predicted this was coming.

Trustees Report Coming Next Week

     The National Academy of Social Insurance has scheduled an event for July 23 featuring Stephen Goss, Social Security's Chief Actuary, speaking on the 2015 Social Security Trustees Report. That means that the report will be issued next week, probably Wednesday or Thursday.

Congressman Believes Social Security Is Immoral

     From the Washington Examiner:

While the problem comes down to dollars and cents, the unsustainable nature of federal entitlement programs is also a moral issue, according to House Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price, R-Ga.

"Our goal is to end the immoral practice of forcing more Americans into dependency on broken governmental programs," Price said. "Critics try to claim the moral high ground. They say that they're the ones looking after our seniors and those less well off. Let me ask you, where's the morality in committing seniors and low-income families to a health care system that can't deliver health care...? Is it moral to promise retirement security that the government knows it cannot provide?" ...

History Of Social Security Field Offices

     As part of its observation of the Social Security's upcoming 80th birthday, the Social Security Administration has posted a video on the history of its field offices.

VA Policy On Charging For Medical Records?

     I request lots of records on my Social Security disability clients. It's a major part of what I do. I'm curious. What's the policy or practice of the Department of Veterans Affairs on charging for copies of medical records on their patients? The VA hospital in Durham, NC charges for records but is very slow in responding to requests for those records. The VA hospital in Fayetteville, NC doesn't charge and is fairly prompt in responding to requests for records. What's going on elsewhere?

OIG Wants Social Security To Keep Trying To Collect Those 50 Year Old Debts

     Social Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG) has done a study on the agency's practice of collecting ancient debts -- many over thirty years old and some as old as fifty years -- via offsets of tax refunds. OIG doesn't see any problem with this and basically urges the agency to keep doing it, regardless of the age of the debt. 

     The report says that "for all debts, SSA’s beneficiary records contained detailed information to establish how and when the overpayment occurred." Any field office employees want to comment on this statement?

     The lack of a statute of limitations on collection of overpayments by administrative offset is a disgrace in my opinion. This needs to be addressed by Congress.
     Update: The Washington Post is reporting on this issue.